There was a recently televised WSOP HORSE event in which the players were playing Razz. A short stacked player was in the pot, and Barry Greenstein raised with split sevens and a low door card. He then bet on the next street, driving out a third player who actually had a better low than Barry at the time.
Barry ended up winning vs the all-in by the river, but he took a minute to describe why he'd raised and followed up with another bet to drive out the other player and get heads up with the all-in. His reasoning sounded a lot like this article.
Quote:
...a raise on your part will preserve your probability of winning and maximize your expectation even though your initial cost is higher. On the other hand, a call here will essentially allow the probability of your winning to go down faster than the size of the pot is going up.
Anyway, even if I got the action wrong from the hand, I remember Barry's reasoning reminded me a lot of this article.
